Corporate blended learning in Portugal:
Current status and future directions

Abstract

The aim of this study is to characterize
the current status of blended learning in Portugal,
given that b-learning has grown exponentially in the Portuguese market over
recent years. 38 organizations (representing 68% of all institutions certified
to provide distance training by the Government Labour Office – DGERT -)
participated in this study. The results revealed that in 2007, although the
predominant instructional format in Portugal
was still face-to-face training (65%), e-learning at 15% came in behind
b-learning with 20%. Data also revealed that 50% of distance training
department coordinators believe that b-learning produces better training
outcomes than face-to-face training alone, when considering the same content
and learning objectives. Furthermore, when comparing b-learning and e-learning
outcomes with similar content and learning objectives, 78.1% of these
coordinators declared that b-learning produces better outcomes than e-learning
alone. Hence, the content analysis indicated positive perceptions with regard
to the future direction of b-learning, leading to the conclusion that in the
long-term, corporate b-learning training will develop considerably in this
country.

Introduction

The advent of Information
and Communication Technology (ICT) led to the creation of new industries and
the emergence of new products and services that have steadily become more
readily available to a greater number of people around the globe. Over the last
decades the world has witnessed a rapid rise in the use of ICTs in most human
fields of activity, which has led to important social changes.

And ICTs have had a particularly
strong impact on one specific area: that of training and education with the
development of distance learning courses in which computers, fiber-optic cables
and electronic networks play a central role (Rosenberg, 2001; Friedman, 2007).
By combining all of these technologies, electronic learning (e-learning) has
been able to flourish in the corporate training market because it offers
customers more flexible training solutions (Mackay & Stockport, 2006).
However, it was blended learning (b-learning) that gained the most popularity:
combining face-to-face instruction with online sessions has proved to have a
stronger impact on individuals' performance and motivation, than e-learning
alone (Bersin, 2004).

Although the importance
of e-learning and b-learning continues to grow in the current global market,
there is still a need to develop more quality distance courses in order to
contribute to business success (Rosenberg,
2008). Both distance training solutions require new ways of teaching and
learning that enable the technology to mediate the learning process and the
development and acquisition of competencies (El-Deghaid & Nouby, 2007).

In a European country
such as Portugal the quality and good practices related to corporate training,
in both face-to-face and distance training are recognized by the Governmental
Labour Office (DGERT), which formally certifies the organizations that have
evidenced high quality standards in providing both face-to-face training and
distance training, in domains, such as diagnosis, design, development,
implementation and evaluation.

Corporate Distance Training

Nowadays, distance training
using technology plays an important role in the corporate training market, and
the emergence of these training solutions has only been possible due to the
appearance and development of e-learning.

According to Rosenberg
(2001, p. 28) "e-learning refers to the use of internet technologies to deliver
a broad array of solutions that enhance knowledge and performance". In this
way, e-learning has amply demonstrated its potential by overcoming several
limitations of conventional face-to-face instruction, such as, high costs
(Bliuc, Goodyear & Ellis, 2007), schedule inflexibility (Bersin, 2004) and
geographical barriers (So & Brush, 2008), to name a few.

There are, however,
drawbacks to e-learning activities and tutoring: poor interactivity
(trainee-trainer interaction, trainee-trainee interaction and trainee-content
interaction); lack of feedback from the trainer (Salmon, 2004), and poorly
structured synchronous sessions (Salmon, 2002a). These limitations to
e-learning had all contributed to the emergence of b-learning.

Blended Learning

Blended learning is
considered a hybrid training modality which combines two different forces:
conventional face-to-face instruction and e-learning (Rosenberg,
2008).

Although this definition
of b-learning has been the target of some criticism, Graham (2006) explains
that it more rigorously reveals the historical evolution of the concept.
According to this author, traditional face-to-face instruction was, over
several centuries, the only format of education, until the emergence of ICT
allowed knowledge and learning to be delivered and assimilated in new ways.
Following this line of reasoning, when e-learning emerged in the market, it
remained separate from conventional face-to-face instruction, because each
training modality employed different method combinations and addressed the
needs of different audiences.

Nevertheless, new
advances in technology and the development of instructional design have brought
about the convergence of these systems of training, in order to combine the
best of face-to-face practices and flexibility and convenience from virtual
learning systems with greater cost-effectiveness (Roy
e Raymond, 2008). Thus, as Bersin (2004, as cited in Mackay & Stockport,
2006, p. 85) stresses, b-learning "is designed to obviate the failures in
e-learning due to high attrition rates by combining classroom and e-learning
sessions and increasing the motivation of the participants to complete learning
programs."

In terms of the present
study, a definition of b-learning is used that approaches this concept on a
holistic perspective: "Blended learning" constitutes a training modality that
involves the use of different pedagogical methods and techniques, through a
combination of classroom and online sessions, with the purpose of achieving the
best learning outcomes (e.g.: Rosenberg, 2001;Bersin, 2004;Graham, 2006).

There is a vast body of
literature regarding b-learning in academic settings. However there is a lack
of information related to b-learning and other forms of distance learning, such
as e-learning and mobile learning (m-learning), in the corporate training
context. Indeed, there are no Portuguese studies providing a general
characterization of this type of b-learning training in corporate settings.

Hence, given that there
is no academic research currently available, the aim of this research is to
provide valuable information about the current status of b-learning in Portugal
in five core aspects. Firstly, it explored the e-learning and b-learning
activities promoted by the organizations in the present sample. Secondly, it
analyzed how those organizations facilitate cooperation among trainees and how
they assist trainees on b-learning courses. Thirdly, the use of electronic
platforms and the types of pedagogical devices distributed on these platforms
were also explored. Fourthly, it analyzed the training assessment practices
employed by the organizations. Finally, it explored several perceptions of
training outcomes, including an analysis of the future directions of
b-learning.

Method

Participants

This research involved
the study of 38 organizations in Portugal,
which provide corporate distance training using technology. The present sample
consisted of 68% of all DGERT's distance training certified organizations as of
December of 2008.

Concerning the activity
sector of each organization, we found that the majority (57.9%) developed
activities related to corporate training. With regard to the size of these
organizations, the majority (56.7%) were small and medium size (37.8% had
between 11 to 50 employees and 18.9% had between 51 to 200 employees). For
further information see Table 1.

Measures

An online survey, sent out to
the coordinators of Distance Training Departments, was used to collect
statistical data regarding information about the organizations they
represented. As Singh, Taneja and Mangalaraj (2009) stress, the use of online
surveys provides researchers with many opportunities, but it also presents some
challenges. One of the advantages of conducting online survey
research is that it provides access to individuals with Internet experience who
are otherwise difficult to contact due to limitations of time and distance.
Moreover, using this kind of tool increases researcher convenience due to
automated data collection, which decreases researcher time and effort. Finally,
online surveys cost less than paper surveys and face-to-face group or
individual interviews; the cost of printing paper forms, travel expenses and
telephone calls is reduced, or even eliminated (Wright, 2005; Van Selm &
Jankowski, 2006).

E-learning
and b-learning activities. In this first dimension,
questions focused on what training services were supplied to the market, the
type of customers and divulgation of the course in the media.

Cooperation
and assistance. This section addressed interactivity among
trainees and the channels which facilitate this interaction. Additionally, it
explored the existence of an e-learning team and its main functions, with
special focus on e-tutoring.

Platforms
and support. In this dimension the questions focused
on the type of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) and Learning Content
Management Systems (LCMSs) employed by these organizations to manage and
organize training courses, as well as the pedagogical support that was provided
in the platforms during the courses.

Training
assessment. The questions here were designed to
determine what means the organizations use to evaluate trainee performance, and
what the criteria was for conferring training certificates.

Training
outcomes. This final section addressed measuring trainee
satisfaction and feedback regarding b-learning courses. In addition, thoughts
on the future direction of b-learning were also explored.

A combination of
quantitative and qualitative approaches was used with statistical analyses for
each closed question, and content analysis for the open questions. With regard
to content analyses, we developed a category dictionary and a frequency table.
The former was intended to present the definitions of each category, and the
latter to illustrate their weights. As Stemler (2001) stresses, the advantage
of content analysis is that it permits an objective and systematic treatment of
qualitative data through the definition of categories, based on explicit rules
of codification.

Procedures

To begin with, we accessed DGERT's official database containing all the certified organizations that use
both face-to-face and distance training. Then we filtered the institutions
certified in distance training and, having found their telephone numbers, we
phoned each company's headquarters to present the study and outline its
objectives to the coordinators of the distance training departments. Later, an
email was sent to each of the course coordinators explaining the aim of the
study in greater detail and asking them to answer an online survey.

Results

E-learning and B-learning Activities

The results revealed that 89.5%
of the organizations have developed b-learning courses, leaving 10.5% who have
not developed this type of training format. Taking into consideration only
those organizations who already use b-learning, the results revealed that the
average time this kind of training solution had been in existence was
approximately 6 years (SD=3.564) and the organization with the longest
tradition of b-learning training had first implemented these solutions in 1995.
The results also showed an average of 17 different b-learning titles per
organization (SD=23.205), ranging from a minimum of 1 course to a
maximum of 120 different courses. The majority of these organizations (54.5%),
however, had up to 10 different b-learning training titles (Table 2).

With regard to
e-learning courses alone, our findings revealed that 70.3% of these
organizations deliver this type of training, leaving 29.7% who have not
developed e-learning training exclusively.

The
data indicated an average of 15 different e-learning courses per organization (SD=28.812),
ranging from a minimum of 1 course to a maximum of 135 different titles.
However, the majority of these organizations (65.3%) had up to 10 e-learning
training titles (Table 2).

In
addition, both b-learning and e-learning courses were categorized in four core
training fields: behavioural training, linguistic training, professional
training and technological training. Technological training refers to
information technologies and microcomputer training solutions. Professional
training refers to fields of expertise such as finance, management, tourism,
just to name a few.

Of all
the b-learning training solutions available on the market, we observed that
66.7% of the organizations deliver these courses to particular clients, 80.6%
deliver these training solutions within the format of inter-company training
and 61.1% develop intra-company training. Furthermore, we found that in general
(79.4%) b-learning courses start with a face-to-face session. 11.8% of the
organizations start these courses with an online session and 8.8% of the
organizations will vary in relation to which format they start with.

With regard to the conception
of the training content, data have revealed that in 84.2% of the cases, the
courses are designed by the organizations and that in more than half the cases the
content experts work for the organization (57.6%). 18.2% of these organizations
hired external consultants as content experts, and 24.2% have both internal and
external content consultants. The data also indicated that 73% of the
organizations design e-learning modules according to customers' needs. With
regard to the idiom in which b-learning training contents are developed, the
results showed that all organizations use Portuguese, 26.3% also have content
in English, and 9.7% have training content in French, 15.8% have content in
other languages (e.g. Spanish and Italian).

As far as promoting e-learning
and b-learning courses in the media is concerned, these organizations revealed
the Internet as the delivery channel of choice, mainly through the use of
online newsletters and the organizations' own web sites (93.9%). However,
recourse to newspapers (36.4%), with both large and small circulations,
pamphlets and brochures (24.2%) was also current practice in these
organizations, but to a lesser degree. The organizations also used other
channels, such as fax and word-of-mouth exposure (36.4%).

Finally, considering the total
amount of training courses in the present sample in 2007, we observed a total
of 4208 different deliveries, in the several training modalities. 15% of these
courses were developed in the e-learning format, 20% were b-learning courses
and 65% were face-to-face courses.

Blended Learning Results

The results in this
section only encompass those organizations that have developed b-learning
training solutions. Hence, only 34 organizations from this sample will be
considered in the following analyses.

Cooperation and Assistance

In terms of promoting
interactivity among trainees, these organizations (97.1%) generally use
Internet forums (91.2%) and chat rooms (73.5%). Other channels of
communication, such as video conferencing (23.5%) and audio conferencing
(23.5%) were less significant (Table 3). Wiki spaces and blogs constitute other
forms of encouraging interactivity, but on a lower scale (15.8%). The results
also revealed that a considerable percentage of the organizations promote
teamwork (76.5%), as well as individual activities (97%).

Data also indicated that 91.2%
of the organizations have an e-learning development team, whose principal
functions involve: platform administration, pedagogical coordination, content
development, development of e-learning supports, providing a help desk,
tutorials and training management. The average size of these teams was 7
members (SD=6.167), which varied from a minimum of 2 elements to a
maximum of 34 elements.

Finally, 94.1% of the
organizations employ a proactive tutoring process for trainees with the tutor
generally contacting trainees daily (26.7%) or weekly (53.3%). Most tutors
responded to trainees' requests within 24 hours (75.8%).

Platforms and Support

Concerning the use of
electronic platforms, we found that all of the organizations in the present
sample used one or more LMSs. 75.8% of these institutions acquired their
platforms on the market, with particular emphasis on the Moodle, Blackboard and Formare platforms. The other 24.2% organizations have developed
exclusive LMSs. Results also show that 58.8% of these organizations also use
LCMSs.

With regard to the pedagogical
support usually available for the platforms (Table 4), we observed that the
main support provided was in the shape of PDF documents (97.1%), interactive
modules (85.3%), Word documents (79.4%), and videos (82.4%).

In addition to this, we found
that only 36.7% have previously used customer LMSs' to deliver b-learning
courses.

Training Assessment

Regarding training evaluation,
91.2% of the present institutions employ diagnostic assessment as a way to
evaluate trainees' knowledge in the first training session. Data suggested that
all organizations use formative evaluation, 94.1% employ summative evaluation
and 73.5% also use participation reports. The results also revealed that 73.5%
of the organizations use online tests to assess trainees' knowledge during
courses.

Additionally, the majority of
the organizations (97.1%) award professional training certificates to trainees.
These certificates take two forms: one is for participating on the course and
the other for level of competence attained. Certain criteria such as: trainee
involvement, assiduity, attendance at face-to-face sessions and obtaining a
minimum grade in the activities, determine whether trainees receive these
certificates.

Training Outcomes

The results showed that all of
the organizations used questionnaires to evaluate trainees' satisfaction with
b-learning courses. These were either sent for completion online or completed
during a face-to-face session.

With regard to trainees' difficulties which were reported by these organizations, we found that in
general they faced six main obstacles when participating in b-learning courses:
1) ineffective time management, 2) lack of self-discipline, 3) inappropriate
characteristics from hardware and software, which minimize or disable the use
of b-learning training solutions, (e.g. low potential of the graphic cards,
inexistence of flash player programs and low internet connections), 4)
difficulty working as part of a team, 5) difficulty in using the e-learning
platform, and 6) poor tutorial quality.

Content analysis
revealed that course coordinators are used to dealing with different attitudes
from trainees. Based on what a trainee's daily job is, the coordinators were
able to differentiate three kinds of attitudes and behaviours regarding
b-learning courses: there are trainees who are enthusiastic regarding
b-learning and open to new experiences; other trainees are very cautious and
doubtful regarding the effectiveness of b-learning when they start, but gain
confidence as they become more acquainted with what b-learning entails; and
some trainees never manage to feel at ease with b-learning, saying they
preferred traditional training methods. Based on that empirical evidence, and
for ease of reference, these attitudes were categorized: proactive, evolutionary, and reactive. The majority of course coordinators (67.6%) cited
interaction with proactive trainees, 20.6% of these coordinators said they had
interaction with evolutionary trainees, and only 11.8% of course coordinators
said they had managed to have interaction with reactive trainees on b-learning
training programs (Table 5 shows some of course coordinators statements).

-
The initial enrolment is difficult, but from the moment they try it, at
least 50% of trainees want to repeat.

-
In the beginning there are doubts about the method.

Reactive

11.8

- They are very fearful.

- With insufficient maturity to accept b-learning courses.

When asked about the
outcomes of b-learning, compared to face-to-face training outcomes for the same
content and learning goals, 50% of the course coordinators of distance training
departments indicated that b-learning presented better outcomes than
face-to-face training alone. Furthermore, when comparing b-learning and
e-learning outcomes with similar contents and learning goals, 78.1% of these
coordinators mentioned that b-learning produces better outcomes than e-learning
alone (Table 6).

Finally, the content analysis
revealed two different categories of course coordinator attitudes regarding
future directions for Portuguese corporate b-learning: enthusiastic and apprehensive.
The enthusiastic coordinators (70.8%) manifested strong confidence in the
development of corporate b-learning, and its future dominance, while the
apprehensive coordinators expressed doubts. Their main concern was with regard
to e-learning barriers, which need to be overcome. (Table 7 shows some
statements about course coordinators attitudes).

- It will increase, mainly, with the
construction of content based on 2.0 Web tools (more informative and
collaborative).

- It will become institutionalized at
all levels of education.

Apprehensive

29.4

- It is a viable solution
from a pedagogical point of view, it could also eliminate geographical
barriers, but there still is a long way to go.

- It has potential but there
are obvious geographical limitations and costs are too high.

Discussion and preliminary
conclusions

This paper constitutes an
attempt to characterize the level of corporate b-learning in Portugal
given that there is no academic research currently available on the subject.
The study on which this article is based provides information about the current
status of b-learning in five core aspects: (1) e-learning and b-learning
activities, (2) cooperation and assistance, (3) platforms and support, (4)
training assessment and (5) training outcomes. Sixty eight per cent of all
certified distance training organizations in Portugal
were contemplated in this study.

Results of this research
suggest that b-learning has a short tradition in Portugal,
because it only appeared on the training market in the late 1990s. However,
despite the fact it is so recent, it was possible to find a considerable range
of b-learning solutions, in the form of many distinct training titles, available
to companies and other institutions. Findings also suggest that corporate
b-learning has considerable weight in the market when compared with other
training solutions, such as face-to-face instruction and e-learning.

Concerning the use of
technology to assist in the learning process, the results show that a
significant proportion of organizations develop exclusive LMSs in an attempt to
customize their b-learning training services. In addition, these organizations
have an e-learning team to ensure the correct implementation of b-learning
programs and good practices in general. Practitioners seemed to be aware of the
importance of interactivity among peers as a way of strengthening the
acquisition of knowledge and the development of competencies. Thus, b-learning
programs have been promoting this kind of interaction through several channels
of communication, in both forms of synchronous channels (e.g. chats) and
asynchronous channels (e.g. forums), and also through collaboration in group
work. Furthermore, trainee-content interaction has proved to be a matter for
careful consideration, requiring the use of more interactive devices such as
interactive modules and videos, in order to aid trainees' self-paced study, and
even to make training a more pleasurable experience (Salmon, 2004). Several
aspects regarding e-tutoring have been received with some caution in corporate
training settings. Findings also showed that there were a significant
proportion of organizations with a proactive tutoring process, which had a
positive impact on trainees who have engaged in b-learning courses, as well as
on trainees' involvement with b-learning solutions (Salmon, 2002a).

Regarding training
evaluation, the study revealed that organizations were greatly concerned about
implementing successful b-learning assessment procedures. In general, these
organizations start their courses with a diagnostic evaluation to assess
trainees' current knowledge in order to discover what needs improving.
Evaluating trainees' knowledge and competencies as the course progresses, and
also at the end of the program, was shown to be common practice among these
organizations. An interesting observation was that the majority of these
organizations use online tests whether for diagnostic evaluation, formative or
summative assessment.

With regard to the
outcomes of corporate b-learning, as we saw earlier, participants exhibited
different attitudes toward this format of training with the majority of course
coordinators being very confident in the development of Portuguese corporate
b-learning while others are apprehensive about the obstacles to b-learning that
still need to be overcome. Mungania (2003) mentions seven factors that
negatively impact e-learning and b-learning: personal barriers, learning style barriers,
instructional barriers, situational barriers, organizational barriers, content
suitability barriers, and technological barriers. In the present study course
coordinators of corporate b-learning programs flagged several of these, with
particular emphasis on the instructional and content suitability barriers. The
former relates to the need to improve the quality of e-tutoring and assistance
(Salmon, 2002a), while the latter shows the importance of developing more
interactive e-contents based on 2.0 Web tools (Clarey, 2007).

Finally, given the
obstacles that characterize e-learning, the course coordinators expressed a
preference for corporate b-learning over e-learning alone. The preference for
b-learning increases when compared to face-to-face training. Yet, there is
still a general belief that face-to-face instruction leads to a better outcome
than any form of distance training.

To sum up, corporate
b-learning in Portugal has
emerged with the aim of offering customers more flexible training solutions in
a way that ensures development and the acquisition of multiple competencies.
Although b-learning is a fairly recent training modality, it has not only
earned acceptance in the Portuguese training market, but in the medium to long
term there is likely to be an increase of this type of training provision in corporate
settings.

Nevertheless, the
success and prevalence of corporate b-learning in Portugal
will require high quality training design, e-tutoring and content development
in order to guarantee trainee engagement and an effective learning process.